ADMAS UNIVERSITY

SCHOOL OF POSTGRADUATE STUDIES

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

Course Title: Mobile and Pervasive Computing

Course Code: CS 654

Network Simulation
Group project

Submitted: Mulugeta A. (Ass.Prof.)

Submission Date: July 09, 2023
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Chapter One
1. Overview
1.1 Introduction
1.2 statement of the problem
1.3 objective
1.3.1 General Objective
1.3.2 Specific Objective
1.4 Significance

Chapter Two
2. Literature Review
2.1 General Concepts
2.2 Related Work

Chapter Three:
3. Methodology
3.1. Research approach
3.2. Parameters used
3.3. Metrics
3.4 tools used

Chapter Four:

4. Implementation and result

4.1 Result
4.2 Result Analysis
4.3. Discussion

Chapter Five:
5. Conclusion and Recommendation
5.1 Conclusion
5.2 Recommendation
 CHAPTER ONE

ABSTRACT

The area of mobile ad hoc networking has received considerable attention of the research community in
recent years. These networks have gained immense popularity primarily due to their infrastructure-less
mode of operation which makes them a suitable candidate for deployment in emergency scenarios like
relief operation, battlefield etc., where either the pre-existing infrastructure is totally damaged or it is not
possible to establish a new infrastructure quickly. However, MANETs are constrained due to the limited
transmission range of the mobile nodes which reduces the total coverage area. Sometimes the
infrastructure-less ad hoc network may be combined with a fixed network to form a hybrid network
which can cover a wider area with the advantage of having less fixed infrastructure. In such a combined
network, for transferring data, we need base stations which act as gateways between the wired and
wireless domains. Due to the hybrid nature of these networks, routing is considered a challenging task.
Several routing protocols have been proposed and tested under various traffic conditions. However, the
simulations of such routing protocols usually do not consider the hybrid network scenario. In this work
we have carried out a systematic performance study of the two prominent routing protocols: Destination
Sequenced Distance Vector Routing (DSDV) and Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) protocols in the
hybrid networking environment. We have analyzed the performance differentials on the basis of three
metrics – packet delivery fraction, average end-to-end delay and normalized routing load under varying
pause time with different number of sources using NS2 based simulation.

Keywords
Mobile Ad Hoc Network, Routing Protocols, Hybrid Network, Performance Study, Packet Delivery
Fraction, Average End-to-End delay, Normalized Routing Load.

1. INTRODUCTION

The mobile ad hoc networks (MANET) have received increased attention of the research community in
the current decade due their self-organizing, self-controlled and distributed nature of operations which
separate them from the fixed networks. The main advantage of these networks is that their non-reliance
on any established infrastructure or centralized server. These networks are autonomous where a number
of mobile nodes equipped with wireless interfaces communicate with each other either directly or
through other nodes. These networks are especially useful in emergency scenarios where there is no
fixed infrastructure or the previous infrastructure is totally destroyed and it is not possible to set up a
new infrastructure quickly. The communication in MNAET is multi-hop and each node has to play the
role of both the host as well as the router. But due to the limited transmission range of the MANET
nodes, the total area of coverage is often limited. Also due to the lack of connectivity to the fixed
network, the users in the MANET work as an isolated group. However, many applications require
connection to the external network such as Internet or LAN to provide the users with external resources.

Figure 1. Hybrid Network

On the other hand the growth of Internet has been tremendous in the current decade and with its reducing
cost of use, it has occupied a huge part of the lives of the common people. For example people present
in any part of the world and connected to the Internet can communicate between them in almost no time
using email, online audio and video chat. This plays an important role in the field of academics and
research. No longer are the students restricted by their physical presence. For example students in distant
areas can participate in the online classroom facilities provided by the top universities, they can
download the study materials, raise questions and discuss their problems online. The researchers and
scientists in different parts of the world can collaborate and work in groups and exchange their ideas
instantaneously. Their distributed geographic presence no longer constrains the scope and rapid growth
of research. On the other hand with the huge influx of mobile phones, laptops and personal digital
assistants along with their reduced cost, mobility has become an indispensable part of our daily lives.
These devices are highly portable and can be carried anytime anywhere. With the increasing use of these
devices there is a growing demand for the connectivity to the Internet while we are on the move.
In order to access the global services and applications of the Internet and for widening the coverage area
of the MANET, sometimes a hybrid network can be formed by combining the ad hoc network with the
wired network. By using this combination we can cover a larger area with less fixed infrastructure, less
number of fixed antennas and base station and can reduce the overall power consumption. Due to the
hybrid nature of these networks, routing is considered a challenging task. Several routing protocols have
been proposed and tested under various traffic conditions. However, the simulations of such routing
protocols have not taken into account the hybrid network scenario. In this work we have carried out a
systematic performance study of the two prominent routing protocols: Destination Sequenced Distance
Vector Routing (DSDV) and Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) protocols in the hybrid networking
environment under different node speed.

What is Destination Sequenced Distance Vector (DSDV)?

Destination Sequenced Distance Vector (DSDV) is a hop-by-hop vector routing protocol requiring
each node to periodically broadcast routing updates. This is a table driven algorithm based on
modifications made to the Bellman-Ford routing mechanism. Each node in the network maintains a
routing table that has entries for each of the destinations in the network and the number of hops required
to reach each of them. Each entry has a sequence number associated with it that helps in identifying stale
entries. This mechanism allows the protocol to avoid the formation of routing loops. Each node
periodically sends updates tagged throughout the network with a monotonically increasing even
sequence number to advertise its location. New route broadcasts contain the address of the destination,
the number of hops to reach the destination, the sequence number of the information received regarding
the destination, as well as a new sequence number unique to the broadcast. The route labeled with the
most recent sequence number is always used. When the neighbors of the transmitting node receive this
update, they recognize that they are one hop away from the source node and include this information in
their distance vectors. Every node stores the “next routing hop” for every reachable destination in their
routing table. The route used is the one with the highest sequence number i.e. the most recent one. When
a neighbor B of A finds out that A is no longer reachable, it advertises the route to A with an infinite
metric and a sequence number one greater than the latest sequence number for the route forcing any
nodes with B on the path to A, to reset their routing tables.
Consider the network in Figure 1 shows the movement of node N1. Table 1 is the routing table at node
N4 before node N1 moves. Table 2 is the routing table updated for node N4 after node N1 moved.
Routing table updates in DSDV are distributed by two different types of update packets:
  Full dump: This type of update packet contains all the routing information available at a node.
As a consequence, it may require several Network Protocol Data Units (NPDUs) to be
transferred if the routing table is large. Full dump packets are transmitted infrequently if the
node only experiences occasional movement.

  Incremental: This type of update packet contains only the information that has changed since
the latest full dump was sent out by the node. Hence, incremental packets only consume a
fraction of the network resources compared to a full dump.

Figure 1. A network illustrating the movement of node N1

 What is Dynamic Source Routing (DSR)?

Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) is a routing protocol used to send data in wireless network designed especially
for use in multi-hop ad hoc networks consisting of mobile nodes which is in our case Laptops. DSR forms on
demand routes (if previously does not know the route). No prior configuration and organization of network is
required. Since Mobile Ad Network is infrastructure less network which manages the network independently each
node cooperate with each other i.e. with those who are in the range. Also in MANET nodes move in the network
and also join and leave the network for all these condition DSR is best suited. In DSR routes are found on demand
so it can work on zero configuration. For sending data from one node to another node in this environment DSR
first uses route discovery cycle for finding route from source to destination in which each node will communicate
with other node in the range and ultimately find the path. Once the path is found Route Reply is send to the source
on the path found.

1.1 Overview of the project

Mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs) are wireless networks that can be rapidly deployed and provide
connectivity to devices without relying on a centralized infrastructure. However, routing in MANETs is
challenging due to the unpredictable changes in network topology caused by node mobility and the
absence of centralized control. This article presents a simulation-based performance analysis of two
routing protocols, DSDV and DSR, in a hybrid networking scenario where MANETs are combined with
fixed networks to cover a wider area with less infrastructure. Several simulation-based experiments have
been conducted to compare the performance of routing protocols for mobile ad hoc networks.
Researchers have used different simulation environments and performance metrics to evaluate the
effectiveness of protocols such as the Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) protocol is a reactive routing
protocol that uses source routing technique, where the source node knows the complete hop-by-hop route
towards the destination node. DSR consists of two phases, Route Discovery and Route Maintenance, to
discover and maintain source routes to arbitrary destinations in the network. On the other hand,
Destination Sequenced Distance Vector Routing (DSDV) is a proactive or table-driven routing protocol
that maintains up-to-date routing information about the frequently changing topology of the network by
periodically exchanging routing tables with their neighbors. DSDV uses full dumps and incremental
updates to reduce the overhead of control traffic and triggered updates when significant new information
is available about the topological change.

1.2 statement of the problem

1.3 Objective/ purpose of the project

We have mentioned the following list of objectives :

  Studied the effect of varying node speed on the performance of two prominent routing
protocols for mobile ad hoc network – Destination Sequenced Distance Vector Routing
(DSDV) and Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) protocol in the hybrid networking environment.
 carried out a detailed ns2 based simulation to study and analyze the performance differentials
of DSDV and DSR in the hybrid scenario under varying node speed with different number of
sources
 The poor performance of DSR in terms of average end-to-end delay is primarily due to its
source routing nature and its inability to expire the stale routes
 At higher node speed we observe that DSR shows lower routing load in comparison to DSDV
 Can conclude that if routing delay is of little concern, DSR shows better performance at higher
mobility in terms of packet delivery fraction and normalized routing load in hybrid networking
scenario.

1.3.1 General Objective

There are two basic groups of routing protocols, Proactive MANET protocol (PMP), Reactive
MANET Protocol (RMP), and whereas the third one is derived from both of these and called as
Hybrid MANET Protocol. The Proactive MANET protocol is generally called table driven
protocol and it detects the network layout periodically. It tries to maintain the routing table at
every node which is used to detect a most feasible route to the destination from the source with
less delay. Proactive MANET protocols provide good reliability and low latency for deciding a
route but these protocols are not suitable for the nodes moving with high speed as the routing
information cannot be updated in the routing table. If a node is not moving, then its routing table
information is updated continuously. It causes more traffic overhead wastage of network resources
such as bandwidth. Another drawback is the unsuitability for large scale MANETs. Reactive
MANET Protocol is called on-demand routing protocol and finds the route when a source node
requests to communicate with the other. On-demand approach is suitable for the nodes with high
mobility and nodes that transmit data rarely. The main drawback of reactive routing protocols is
that the source node broadcasts the routing requests in the whole network and it waits for the
responses. This route discovery procedure causes significant delay and makes them less suitable
for real time traffic. Hybrid MANET Protocol integrates the merits of Proactive and Reactive
Protocols. Zone routing protocol (ZRP) and two zone routing protocols (TZRP) are the examples
of hybrid of MANET protocol.
 1.3.2 Specific Objective

• To conceptualize and test the performance of the AODV and DSR MANET routing protocols in
terms of throughput, packet drop rate, and average end-to-end delay.
• After comparing the throughput, packet drop rate, and average end-to-end delay of typical best-
effort AODV and DSR algorithms.
• To evaluate the challenges of routing in MANET protocols.

1.4 Significance of the project

With the rise of portable devices and advancements in wireless communication, ad hoc networking has
gained popularity in recent years, with a rising number of widely used applications. As a result, the
contribution of this work will make Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks (MANETs) applications more accessible
in a variety of crucial scenarios, including military, commercial, conferencing, education, and
emergency services. Users can access and exchange information via devices regardless of their location
or proximity to infrastructure. In contrast to infrastructure networks, MANETs have all nodes that are
mobile and have dynamic connectivity. MANETs have a wide range of applications, from large-scale,
mobile, highly dynamic networks to small, static networks bound by power sources. As MANETs
become more widespread, the systems that ensure that we receive high-quality MANET services must
also be upgraded. However, they are currently limited in their ability to fully leverage the potential
benefits of MANETs due to a lack of an effective routing protocol. As a result, by establishing simulation
result parameters to support routing approach, this work will improve the usability of MANETs routing
protocol.
 CHAPTER TWO

2. Literature review of the project

2.1 General Concepts definition

(DSDV) is a table driven routing scheme for ad-hoc mobile networks based on the Bellman-ford
algorithm. The improvement made to the Bellman-Ford algorithm includes freedom from loops in
routing table by using sequence numbers. Each node acts as a router where a routing table is maintained
and periodic routing updates are transfer, even if the routes are not necessary. A sequence number is
associated with each route or path to the destination to prevent routing loops. The Routing updates are
exchanged even if the network is idle which uses up battery and network bandwidth. So, it is not
preferable for highly dynamic networks.

DSR (Dynamic Source Routing System) is a reactive (on-demand) routing protocol based on the well-
known source routing idea. There are two primary operational components to the protocol: Route
Discovery and Route Maintenance, as well as Route Request (RREQ), Route Reply (RREP), and Route
Error messages, are three types of route control communications (RERR). When a source node in a
mobile ad hoc network tries to send a packet to a destination for which it does not have a route in its
route cache, it starts the route discovery process by road casting a Route Request packet (RREQ). The
source node address, destination node address, unique sequence number, and an empty route record are
all included in this route request packet. Upon receiving a route request for the first time, each
intermediary node will check its own route cache. If the intermediate node does not have a route to the
destination, it will add its own address to the route record and rebroadcast the RREQ. The intermediate
node will append the cached route to the route record and send a Route Reply (RREP) back to the source
node if it has a route to the destination in its route cache. The whole route record from the source to the
destination is contained in the RREP. By checking the sequence number, the intermediate node
overlooks the late arrival of the same route request. If the destination node receives the route request, it
will copy the route record contained in the route request and send an RREP back to the source. Because
DSR can cache several pathways to a given destination, in most simulation implementations, the
destination node will respond to all route requests received. Furthermore, the destination's responses
precisely represent the most recent communication topology. The routes discovered may become invalid
over time due to node relocation. Route error packets are sent as part of the route maintenance
mechanism (RERR). If a link fails while the route is active, the node upstream sends an RERR to the
source node, informing it of the unreachable destination (s). When a node receives the RERR, it clears
its cache of all routes that contain the broken link. As a result, if the source node still wants the route, it
can start the route discovery process again. Each node transmitting the packet must certify that the packet
has been received by the following hop along the source route in DSR. A link layer acknowledgement
(as in IEEE 802.11) or a passive acknowledgement can be used to accomplish this (in which the first
transmitting node confirms the receipt at the second node by overhearing the second node transmitting
the packet to the third node). It can also be accomplished by the following hop returning a DSR-specific
software acknowledgement. The failure of a route can only be discovered once it has been entered into
the cache.

2.2 Related Work

Extensive research work has been done in the field of MANET routing protocols. Different routing
protocols were simulated in different kind of simulators. Here we will discuss different research papers
about MANET routing protocols performance. In this thesis work we will simulate three MANET
routing protocols in the OPNET modeler 14.5 such as AODV, DSR and OLSR against three different
parameters i.e. delay, network load and throughput. The protocols best in the network delay must be the
finest in the network throughput. Below we will study now different simulators with different routing
protocols and their performance evaluation.

These routing protocols DSDV, AODV, DSR and TORA were simulated using NS2. Analysis gives
different results for every parameter differently. In finding shortest path between the source and
destination nodes, delay, DSDV performs well than AODV, DSR and TORA. DSR perform well in
network load balancing than DSDV, AODV and TORA. DSDV has good jitter than AODV, TORA and
DSR respectively. The results given in analyze DSR and DSDV in idealized and realistic simulation
environments on their performance. Conclusion in mobile ad hoc network that reactive protocols i.e.
AODV and DSR perform well when the network load is moderate. The reactive protocols are saving
many resources like energy and bandwidth. It analyze that the proactive protocols perform well in heavy
network traffic load. In the author give different kind of conclusions about the MANET routing protocols
i.e. DSDV, AODV and DSR were simulated in NS2. The reactive protocol AODV outperforms than
DSDV and DSR in maintaining connection by sequentially exchange of information for TCP based
traffic. The packets were delivered when the node mobility is low and failed to deliver at high mobility.
DSR perform well than DSDV at all mobility. In [6] DSR performs well than DSDV and AODV for
packet dropping rate (PDR), delay and throughput. DSR generates less network load than AODV. The
simulation was done in QUALNET simulator. The author wrote that AODV shows best performance in
low and medium node density but in high node density both OLSR and DSR outperforms. The author
wrote that DSR is selected for file transfers where delivery and throughput are critical factors. OLSR
performs well in both low and high node density. It is stated in that OLSR is best suited in application
oriented traffic e.g. streaming traffic, voice and video traffic. In application based traffic delay is a very
critical factor.
 CHAPTER THREE

3. Methodology

When the author begins to analyze the performance issue of mobile ad hoc networks in a hybrid network
scenario, he basically describes the main concepts of mobile ad hoc network and to find out the
performance gap of this mobile ad hoc network that implemented with the hybrid network. On this paper
the researcher use selected and evaluated DSDV and DSR routing protocols with on the base of this
three parameter metrics methodology- packet delivery fraction, average end-to-end delay and
normalized routing load using NS2-based simulation to identify the result of research.

3.1. Research approach

A new way of contrasting and comparing the performance of two routing protocols for mobile ad hoc
networks was tested using the network simulator application NS-2.35 using simulated settings. The
performance of the routing protocols DSDV and DSR was examined in this study. On-demand routing
initiated by the source is an alternative to table-driven routing. Routes are only built when the source
node requests them in this kind of routing. When a node needs to get to a given location, it initiates the
network's route discovery process. The process is complete once a route has been determined or all
feasible route variants have been evaluated. Network Simulators There are a plethora of network
simulators on the market now that can simulate the MANET. In this section, we'll look at the most well-
known simulators. In this thesis, we'll look at their benefits and drawbacks before deciding which one
to employ as a platform for reactive/proactive treatments and simulations.

3.2. Parameters used

In our simulation environment the MANET nodes use constant bit rate (CBR) traffic sources. We have
used the cbrgen traffic-scenario generator tool available in NS2 to generate the CBR traffic connections
between the nodes. Data packets transmitted are of 512 bytes. Data packets are sent at the rate of 5
packets/second. We have used two different communication patterns corresponding to 30 and 40
sources. The complete list of simulation parameters is shown in Table 1.

Parameter Value
Protocols DSDV, DSR
Number of mobile nodes 70
Number of fixed nodes 10
 Number of sources 30,40
Transmission range 250 m
Simulation time 900 s
Topology size 900 m X 600 m
Source type Constant bit rate
Packet rate 5 packets/sec
Packet size 512 bytes
Pause time 100 seconds
Node speed 5m/s, 10m/s, 15m/s, 20m/s, 25m/s,30m/4
Mobility model Random way point

Table Simulation Parameters.

3.3. Performance Metrics

We have primarily selected the following three performance metrics in order to study the performance
comparison of DSDV and DSR.
Packet delivery fraction: This is defined as the ratio between the number of delivered packets and those
generated by the constant bit rate (CBR) traffic sources.
Average end-to-end delay: This metric includes all possible delays caused by buffering at the time of
the route discovery, queuing delay due to waiting at the interface queue, retransmission delays at MAC,
propagation and transfer times. This is basically defined as the ratio between the summation of the time
difference between the packets received time and the packet sent time and the summation of data packets
received by all nodes.
Normalized routing load: This is defined as the number of routing packets transmitted per data packet
delivered at the destination. Each hop-wise transmission of a routing packet is counted as one
transmission.
3.4 tools used
Parameter Value
Protocols DSDV, DSR
Number of mobile nodes 70
Number of fixed nodes 10
Number of sources 30,40
Transmission range 250 m
Simulation time 900 s
Topology size 900 m X 600 m
Source type Constant bit rate
Packet rate 5 packets/sec
Packet size 512 bytes
Pause time 100 seconds
Node speed 5m/s, 10m/s, 15m/s, 20m/s, 25m/s,30m/4
Mobility model Random way point
 CHAPTER FOUR

Implementation and result

4.1 Result
4.2 Result Analysis

Simulation study shows that performance of routing protocol in terms of throughput, packet delivery
ratio, end to end delay and routing overhead and energy consumption strongly depends upon network
conditions such as mobility, no. of nodes .The set of experiments uses varying no. of nodes and varying
speed to analyze throughput, packet delivery ratio, end to end delay, routing overhead and energy
consumption.

Network Simulators

Nowadays, there are many network simulators that can simulate the MANET. In this section we will
introduce the most commonly used simulators. We will compare their downsides and upsides and
choose one to as platform to implement reactive/proactive protocol and conduct simulations in this
thesis.

Network Simulator – ns2 [12]

Ns2 is a discrete event simulator targeted at networking research. It provides substantial support for
simulation of TCP, routing and multicast protocols over wired and wireless networks. It consists of two
simulation tools. The network simulator (ns) contains all commonly used IP protocols. The network
animator (nam) is use to visualize the simulations. Ns2 fully simulates a layered network from the
physical radio transmission channel to high-level applications.

Ns2 is an object-oriented simulator written in C++ and OTcl. The simulator supports a class hierarchy
in C++ and a similar class hierarchy within the OTcl interpreter. There is a one-to-one correspondence
between a class in the interpreted hierarchy and one in the compile hierarchy. The reason to use two
different programming languages is that OTcl is suitable for the programs and configurations that
demand frequent and fast change while C++ is suitable for the programs that have high demand in speed.
Ns2 is highly extensible. It not only supports most commonly used IP protocols but also allows the users
to extend or implement their own protocols. The latest ns2 version supports the four ad hoc routing
protocols, including DSR. It also provides powerful trace functionalities, which are very important in
our project since various information need to be logged for analysis. The full source code of ns2 can be
downloaded and compiled for multiple platforms such as Unix, Windows and Cygwin.

4.3. Discussion
 CHAPTER FIVE

5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

5.1 Conclusion

In this paper we have compared DSDV and DSR in the hybrid scenario under varying node speed with
different number of sources. We have found that DSDV shows better packet delivery performance than
DSR at lower node speed, but DSDV shows more deterioration in the packet delivery performance at
higher node speed. At higher node speed, DSR shows lower routing load in comparison to DSDV,
because DSR applies aggressive caching technique and maintains multiple routes to the same
destination. At lower node speed, DSDV shows better performance in terms of packet delivery fraction
and normalized routing load.

5.2 Recommendation

Using ns2-based simulations. The results show that DSDV performs better than DSR in terms of packet
delivery at lower node speeds due to its ability to quickly find fresh routes, while DSR performs better
at higher node speeds due to its aggressive caching technique and ability to maintain multiple routes to
the same destination. However, DSDV outperforms DSR in terms of average end-to-end delay.
REFERENCES

[1] Dow, C. R, (March 2005) A Study of Recent Research Trends and Experimental Guidelines in

Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks, In: Proceedings of 19th International Conference on Ad-vanced

Information Networking and Applications, IEEE, Vol. 1, pp. 72-77.

[2] Freisleben, B., Jansen, R, (1997) Analysis of Routing Protocols for Ad hoc Networks of Mobile

Computers, In: Proceedings of the 15th IASTED International Conference on Applied

Informatics, IASTED-ACTA Press, pp. 133-136, Innsbruck, Austria.

[3] Royer, E. M. , Toh, C. K, (April 1999) A Review of Current Routing Protocols for Ad hoc

Mobile Wireless Networks, IEEE Personal Communications Magazine, pp. 46-55.

[4] Anastasi, G., Borgia, E., Conti, M., Gregori, E, (2003) IEEE 802.11 Ad-hoc Networks:

Protocols, Performance and Open Issues, Ad hoc Networking. IEEE Press Wiley, New York.

[5] Arun Kumar, B. R., Reddy, Lokanatha C., Hiremath, Prakash S, (January-June 2008) A Survey

of Mobile Ad hoc Network Routing Protocols, Journal of Intelligent System Research.

[6] Rappaport, T. S, (1996) Wireless Communications, Principles & Practices. Prentice Hall.

[7] Vaidya, Nitin H, (2004) Mobile Ad Hoc Networks: Routing, MAC and Transport Issues,

Tutorial presented at INFOCOM 2004 (IEEE International Conference on Computer

Communication), University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

[8] Arun Kumar, B. R., Reddy, Lokanatha C., Hiremath, Prakash S, (2008) Mobile Ad hoc

Networks: Issues, Research Trends and Experiments, International Engineering and Technology

(IETECH) Journal of Communication Techniques, Vol. 2, No. 2.

[9] Toh, C. K, (2002) Ad-Hoc Mobile Wireless Networks. Prentice Hall.

[10] Tanenbaum, Andrew S, (2002) Computer Networks. Fourth Edition. Prentice Hall.

[11] Corson, S. , Macker, J, (January 1999) Mobile Ad hoc Networking (MANET): Routing Protocol

Performance Issues and Evaluation Considerations, IETF MANET Working Group RFC-2501.

[12] Murthy, C. S. R., Manoj, B. S, (2004) Ad Hoc Wireless Networks: Architecture and Protocols,
Prentice Hall Communications, Engineering and Emerging Technologies Series, New Jersey.

[13] Comer, D, (2000) Internetworking with TCP/IP, Volume 1, Prentice Hall.

[14] Blum, Jermy I., Eskandarian, Azim , Ho_man, Lance J, (Dec. 2004) Challenges of inter-vehicle

Ad hoc Networks, IEEE transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems. Vol. 5, No. 4.

[15] Das, S. R., Castaeda, R., Yan, J, (2000) Simulation-based Performance Evaluation of Routing

Protocols for Mobile Ad hoc Networks, Mobile Networks and Applications, Vol. 5, pp. 179-189.

International Journal of Wireless & Mobile Networks (IJWMN) Vol. 4, No. 4, August 2012

281

[16] Das, Samir R., Perkins, Charles E., Royer, Elizabeth M, (March 2000) Performance Comparison

of two On-demand Routing Protocols for Ad hoc Networks, In: Proceedings of the IEEE

Conference on Computer Communications (INFOCOM), Tel Aviv, Israel, pp. 3-12.

[17] Johansson, P., Larsson, T., Hedman, N., Mielczarek, B, (August 1999) Routing Protocols for

Mobile Ad-hoc Networks - A Comparative Performance Analysis, In: Proceedings of the 5th

International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking (ACM MOBICOM'99).

[18] Park, Vincent D., Corson, M. Scott, (June 1998) A Performance Comparison of TORA and Ideal

Link State Routing, In: Proceedings of IEEE Symposium on Computers and Communication '98.

[19] Fall, K., Vardhan, K. Eds, (1999) Ns notes and documentation, available from,

http://www.mash.cd.berkeley.edu/ns/.

[20] Network Simulator-2 (NS2), http://www.isi.edu/nsnam/ns

[21] The CMU Monarch Project: The CMU Monarch Projects Wireless and Mobility Extensions to

ns, http://www.monarch.cs.cmu.edu (1998).

[22] Altman, E., Jimenez, T, (2003) NS Simulator for Beginners, Lecture notes. Univ. de Los Andes,

Merida, Venezuela and ESSI. Sophia-Antipolis, France.

[23] IEEE Computer Society LAN MAN Standards Committee, (1997) Wireless LAN Medium

Access Control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications, IEEE Std 802.11-1997. The

Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, New York.